Mrs.Nirmala, v. The District Collector,

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 29.11.2017

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE T.RAJA W.P.No.30894 of 2017 Mrs.Nirmala W/o Sudhakar ..

Petitioner -vs1. The District Collector Sathuvachari Vellore

2. The Revenue Divisional Officer Ranipet, Nemili Taluk Vellore District, Vellore

3. The Union Welfare of Child Development Officer Office of the Union Welfare Department Nemili Taluk

4. Mrs.N.Sarala ..

Respondents Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying for the issue of a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents 1 to 3 herein to appoint the petitioner herein as Noon Meal Organizer at Perumbulipakkam Village Panchayat immediately.

For Petitioner :: Mr.R.Ramesh For Respondents :: Mr.V.Jayaprakash Narayanan Special Government Pleader for R1 to 3

ORDER

The petitioner seeks for issuance of a writ of mandamus, directing the respondents 1 to 3 to consider her representation for the post of Anganwadi Assistant at Perumbulipakkam Village Panchayat.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the fourth respondent has already been appointed without considering the case of the petitioner. When the respondents called for interview by a call letter dated 4.9.2017 with an advise to bring all the documents to be shown in the interview on 18.9.2017 at 1.00 P.M., the petitioner carried all the certificates and produced before the interview committee on the said date. When two posts are lying vacant in Samathuvapuram Panchayat and one post in Perumbulipakkam Village Panchayat, six persons applied for the above posts. The petitioner applied for two places, namely, Samathuvapuram and Perumbulipakkam panchayats and in both the places, the respondents have not chosen the petitioner. Therefore, she has given a representation and the said representation should be directed to be considered, he pleaded.

3. But this Court is unable to entertain the writ petition for the following reasons. Firstly, when the petitioner is aware of the appointment of the fourth respondent, if she is aggrieved by the appointment of the fourth respondent, she should only challenge the correctness of the said order. Unfortunately, even a copy of the appointment order has not been filed. Therefore, this Court is not able to appreciate for what reason the fourth respondent was appointed and the reason for not appointing the petitioner. When the petitioner is not even able to explain before this Court on what basis she has got higher merits than the fourth respondent, the writ petition has to be rejected. Accordingly, the writ petition stands dismissed. Consequently, W.M.P.No.33817 of 2017 is also dismissed. No costs. Sd/- Asst.Registrar (CS V ) /true copy/ Sub Asst. Registrar ss To

1. The District Collector Sathuvachari Vellore

2. The Revenue Divisional Officer Ranipet, Nemili Taluk Vellore District, Vellore

3. The Union Welfare of Child Development Officer Office of the Union Welfare Department Nemili Taluk + 1 cc to Mr.R.Ramesh Advocate,SR.84823 + 1 cc to The Govt.Pleader, SR.85424 W.P.No.30894 of 2017 NR 15/12/2017